What are everyone's thoughts on book 3? (The Devastation of Tallarn)

[Crablezworth]

So as the title says, I assume most have only had a few days to take it all in, some lucky one perhaps longer. So what are everyone's thoughts so far? Plans? What will you be hoping to try in the weeks ahead? What have you perhaps already tried?

 

 

 

 

Myself I'm excited to try battle honours assuming opponent is also of the same mind. I was happy to see they're limited to one per formation and I think that's a good call. I would want veteran or specialist detachment to feel truly special and it'd be a lot less meaningful without the limitations as many more detachments would likely receive them as some are quite good/strong. There are some very straight forward ones like forward observer for cavalry. I'm hoping it will spark some ideas on the modelling side as well, a reason to paint a solar aux unit a bit differently and possibly name them. There are some foreseeable contentious ones, the middle one for knights, essentially gives knights blessed auto simulacra, but, as written, seemingly can stack with simulacra, granting extra rolls. A knight that already has simulacra with that battle honour would be rolling 2 dice to for each wound suffered in the end phase to try and regain them. One of the vehicle one sounds pretty good for baneblades and hellhammers.

 

 

The fog of war rule I'm stoked to try. It's well written, make it clear both parties should be on board with it at the list construction phase and its not to just be dropped on one's opponent. The hidden deployment stuff is a bit much for me but its made clear that can be ignored if neither player is down. The fog limiting most weapon ranges with the exception of barrage and heavy barrage is interesting. I would have like them to be a bit more explicit in terms of how things like cover stack, I would have also perhaps liked it to be a place where they try like with AT to perhaps not always have 6's be a hit. The fog doesn't just limit max range to 18, if the target is more than 12 inches away a -1 to hit is incurred, in addition, if the target is more than 6 away a cover save of 5+ is granted. Most of this I think is cool and we may see tank battles perhaps be more interesting on account of this. With that said I would have liked just some more explicit language around how the hit modifiers stack, if no cover applies explicitly and so on. Most of these are easy to infer, but going back to the issue of 6's always hitting, a lot of this might not matter on account of that. Will planes be ignoring the -1? The cover? I'm less sure of their intent there.

 

One of the best aspects of the fog of war rule imo is the deadly fog portion. Infantry and cavalry having to take saves in the end phase or melt seems appropriate for the setting, but more important, appropriate for the current state of the games meta/balance, with infantry largely being ascendant. I don't love having to still test inside structures but we'll see how it goes as the infantry at least would be granted a re-roll if inside. Currently cavalry don't really have anywhere they're able to hide inside so, keeping them in reserve might be the way to go. 

 

New unit are a mixed bag, sabres seem good, even great for their new setting. Sicarans are both interesting, the punisher I feel has more potential of the two. The marine tank commander are interesting but a bit weird we didn't get something similar for solar aux to expand on the more simplistic one they have as it'd be nice to have a commander join different tank detachments like the legion ones can now. The solar aux side is a bit disappointing. All 3 of the new super heavies have a stat line mistake, where they should have 2 lascannon shots like the baneblade, they only have 1. I don't think this was intentional, I believe its a genuine error. Last I check, legion builder still had them at 2 thankfully. That said, shadow sword is too expensive given the other super heavies out there and their costs. The other two not even having small blasts is a disappointment. A plasma blastgun without a blast continues to be sore point.  A single shots 30 inch demolisher is also very meh, even if all 3's weapons had small blasts they'd still only be ok in my eyes. The new russes, the plasma again is a disappointment, autocannon same, demolisher is nice to have but with them available on dracosans its sorta meh, the lascannon is decent but still second to vanq, and vanq is still king. The new formation for them is also a bit cynical/marketing-ish because it only allows the "new" russes. They're all still somehow the exact same cost, so doing the formation thing just seems arbitrary and aimed at the c-suite and not the end user. The drills... look cool. Their cost is a bit of a head scratcher, as is the whole chinese fire drill thing. 

 

What are your thoughts so far? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Pacific81]

I think you have probably hit the nail on the head with most of that @Crablezworth, I would probably give it a 2.5/5 stars? If you love Legions and collect everything for it, then its a worthwhile purchase, but it won't turn anyone to the game who doesn't already collect.

 

I like some of the background material and writing, it does a good job of setting the scene, even though the presentation and formatting leaves me cold - I know this war is very bleak, but would a little splash of colour go amiss? The timeline of events for example which are literally just boxes on a black-backgrounded page - it's incredible dull. Similarly whoever is doing the photoshopped mode images is definitely getting better at, some you could now probably class as 'art', but for me it still falls a country mile short of the sort of thing that was in Collected Visions or anything by Neil Roberts, and that sort of material not being used for this game is a soap-box I will continue to stand on and bleat about. 

 

Content wise I like the campaign rules, which are very minimalistic but should hopefully form a nice platform for people to run their own campaigns and add some more depth. There is no balancing concept either (instead giving more points to the winning sides in subsequent battles). Although they also can't really compensate for the lack of new units - if they keep going at this rate we are going to end up with 15 books to get a full spread of the heresy!  - and it gives the feeling of the book being a bit light on content. Similarly some of the Legion-specific formations will only be of interest to some, and makes the whole thing feel like 'padding' episodes in season 4 of an 8 season TV series. I'm guessing there will be a new fortress kit at some point, which is a fun idea but again highlights the quite myopic nature of these releases, where GW are terrified of giving rules for any terrain or miniatures that they aren't selling - and it does stifle the scope of the game a lot I feel, at least compared to other Epic versions. 

 

The Fog of War have gone a bit too much turned up to 11 for my liking - it's an interesting concept, but the affects on infantry are so drastic (effectively making all-tank/vehicles armies the only sensible option) I can only see them being used as a curio or one off game. They won't become standard and in no way help to balance the advantage that infantry currently enjoy. Hidden deployment is a fun idea, and I like that the few of the missions included don't have cumulative scoring for objectives, instead giving VPs for destruction of units - I wonder if some of the feedback (or just more playtesting) is getting back to the rules-writers, over the game scoring system which I think is probably the biggest mis-step of the new system in that games are nearly always decided by turn 1 or 2?

[Crablezworth]

 

I think you have probably hit the nail on the head with most of that @Crablezworth, I would probably give it a 2.5/5 stars? If you love Legions and collect everything for it, then its a worthwhile purchase, but it won't turn anyone to the game who doesn't already collect.

 

I like some of the background material and writing, it does a good job of setting the scene, even though the presentation and formatting leaves me cold - I know this war is very bleak, but would a little splash of colour go amiss? The timeline of events for example which are literally just boxes on a black-backgrounded page - it's incredible dull. Similarly whoever is doing the photoshopped mode images is definitely getting better at, some you could now probably class as 'art', but for me it still falls a country mile short of the sort of thing that was in Collected Visions or anything by Neil Roberts, and that sort of material not being used for this game is a soap-box I will continue to stand on and bleat about. 

 

Content wise I like the campaign rules, which are very minimalistic but should hopefully form a nice platform for people to run their own campaigns and add some more depth. There is no balancing concept either (instead giving more points to the winning sides in subsequent battles). Although they also can't really compensate for the lack of new units - if they keep going at this rate we are going to end up with 15 books to get a full spread of the heresy!  - and it gives the feeling of the book being a bit light on content. Similarly some of the Legion-specific formations will only be of interest to some, and makes the whole thing feel like 'padding' episodes in season 4 of an 8 season TV series. I'm guessing there will be a new fortress kit at some point, which is a fun idea but again highlights the quite myopic nature of these releases, where GW are terrified of giving rules for any terrain or miniatures that they aren't selling - and it does stifle the scope of the game a lot I feel, at least compared to other Epic versions. 

 

The Fog of War have gone a bit too much turned up to 11 for my liking - it's an interesting concept, but the affects on infantry are so drastic (effectively making all-tank/vehicles armies the only sensible option) I can only see them being used as a curio or one off game. They won't become standard and in no way help to balance the advantage that infantry currently enjoy. Hidden deployment is a fun idea, and I like that the few of the missions included don't have cumulative scoring for objectives, instead giving VPs for destruction of units - I wonder if some of the feedback (or just more playtesting) is getting back to the rules-writers, over the game scoring system which I think is probably the biggest mis-step of the new system in that games are nearly always decided by turn 1 or 2?

 

As a photoshop person myself, the stuff they're doing is ok and I get why they're using mostly 28mm but at the same time it feels a bit out of place, like leftover assets from HH books. For all the gnashing and wailing about ai art, photoshop art can seem just as sterile at times. 

 

I agree that legion specific stuff just doesn't interest me at all, I also don't want to see this game do book after book to the point where we're all drowning in more formations than actual units to put in them. The russ formation forcing only new russes just rubs me the wrong way. I also really don't want or care more about ever more legion specific stuff, if the core game doesn't work endlessly throwing stuff a the wall to sate 1/18th of a factions player base just seems like the worst possible task any sadist would wish to give gw's rules team. 

 

I think where for of war went perhaps too far was damage still occurring in structures, that and units that are already wounded having to test, that seems more there to sate those who like infantry with "something should happen to tanks too" sorta vibe. I really think it was a missed opportunity to introduce a new terrain type that would allow super heavies and down to take refuge "inside". It would have been an opportune time to introduce a core reserves mechanic for stuff other than flyers/outflankers/deepstrikers. That way players could opt to hold infantry or cav in reserve if they're concerned about them burning out too fast. The game really needs reserves in general, I'm tired of seeing pics of amazing looking games only to find out they went all of 2 turns, that really should be embarassing gw more and perhaps having them look at ditching progressive scoring or at least having a set of matched play scenarios with end game/sudden death. 

 

I 100% agree about the biggest misstep being scoring, I tell everyone to give end  game scoring a try if the intent/goal is to at least try and get a full 5 turn game in. 

[Burni]

I’ve been making my way through the lore of the book and was pleased to see the Aurox mentioned in the context of recon (with some heavy sentinels) so that’s going to be the SA light armour when it arrives, as suspected.

[Crablezworth]

 

I’ve been making my way through the lore of the book and was pleased to see the Aurox mentioned in the context of recon (with some heavy sentinels) so that’s going to be the SA light armour when it arrives, as suspected.

 

The aurox is just a transport though is it not? I would have thought the carnadon would be the light armour choice. 

[Burni]

 

 

The aurox is just a transport though is it not? I would have thought the carnadon would be the light armour choice. 

Ah yeah got my names mixed up sorry.